Turbocharging greatly reduces life of an engine? Educate me please

[KitsuneZero]

I own a 99 GST Spyder. One of the guys I work with insists that turbocharging an engine puts so much more strain on the metal of the engine that it greatly reduces it's life. He says that steel has a melting point and nothing will change that. Forced induction causes so much greater stress of the engine that it makes them unreliable and that they wont last nearly as long as an N/A because of the higher temps.

He says that engines were never designed to be used like that. When I said that the engines were designed accordingly to use a turbocharger he just says again that engines were never ment to do that.

He claims that he doesn't know anyone with a turbocharged engine that had the engine last more then 100K miles.

I think he's full of ****. He also admits to being a fan of the old simple huge V8 engines. Not surprising seeing how he's in his 50's. He even ended our fruitless conversation with saying, "... Plus I just don't like them" with them being turbocharged engines. He prefers simple raw power from giant engines.

SO, is there any validity to what he's saying. I know the 100k mile life of the engine is rubbish, but does the forced induction cause that much greater stress of the metals that they wont last as long as a N/A engine?

Also, can anyone link me to any articles about this subject in general?

[david-b]

Well look at the obvious....
-a turbo is pushing the engine to work harder
-because it's being pushed, there's more 'things' to help in the pushing
-more 'things' result in larger number of items to break

BUT

The engines are built to handle it. Why put low-compression pistons in an engine from the factory? To make it slow? No! To make it handle the turbo that they're putting on at the factory along with those pistons. Turbo cars are made from the factory to handle the turbo.

Turbo cars last well over 100k. Turbos are also good as say in going uphill. N/A cars have to work harder, as the turbo does the work for the motor. Look at semi trucks, and trains, and planes... All use a turbine of some sort. Lots of them don't last that long because stupid dumbass kids beat on them and don't take care of them, and next thing you know those 'things' are broken and destroy the motor. Damn.

This is a pointless post and makes me mad. Who cares what people (especially old people) think. He's going to put up a fight no matter what.

[KitsuneZero]

This is a pointless post and makes me mad. Who cares what people (especially old people) think. He's going to put up a fight no matter what.

I agree that he's stuck in his ways. However this is not a pointless thread. A claim was made regarding my engine and it's physical characteristics. I would like to learn more. I already believe that he's full of hot air, but I want to know that he is. There's nothing wrong with the quest for knowledge, my friend.

[gthompson97]

What do you want to know? You can read about engines for every second for the rest of your life and still not know all there is to know. Nobody knows everything. The point is simple. Engines can be turbo'd and last a very long time, as long as it's made to handle the turbo, if you turbo'd a N/A car, it would reduce it's life, but if it's built for it, why wouldn't you put one on?

That guy is getting to your head, which is exactly what he wants to do. Just ignore him and don't let it bother you.

[TalonEclipseMixGsx]

Originally Posted by KitsuneZero

He claims that he doesn't know anyone with a turbocharged engine that had the engine last more then 100K miles.

My GSX just turned 105K miles today and had a turbo all its life. Sounds to me like the "age is wisdom" saying doesn't apply to him. Tell the old man to stick with his V8's and keep his ignorance to himself.

[Thor06]

Originally Posted by gthompson97

Nobody knows everything.

Except for me, disagree and I ban you.

Ever hear the saying: "Dont argue with an idiot, they will bring you down to thier level and beat you with experience." Heres some perfect proof. EGT's on a NA and a turbo car are not all that dissimilar anyway... IMO the only reason turbo cars are less reliable is because the people that either put the turbo on or own the already turbo car dont know what they are doing and try to get as much possible power out of it without properly building the engine and/or tuning it.

[gthompson97]

Originally Posted by Thor06

Except for me, disagree and I ban you.

Not agaaaaiiiinnnn, I just got un-banned! Haha.

[KitsuneZero]

That guy is getting to your head, which is exactly what he wants to do. Just ignore him and don't let it bother you.

He only got to me for a second, and only because of his complete close mindedness. I just wanted to know if there was any merit to it at all. particulary about the difference in combustion temps between N/A and turbo.

Looks like this turned out much different then I intended.

[cantgo2fast]

Tell that idiot that when i worked in a mercedes shop this summer we got one of those old 240D (turbo diesel)wagons in with 330k ORIGINAL miles on it. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it

[l_eclipse_l]

I don't see why you guys are bagging on this guy...just wanted some ammo he can go at this douchebag V8 fanboy with. I'm usually the one to get annoyed with peoples posts, but this one seemed like he genuinly just wanted information and didn't want to hear it from a book...he wanted real people to enlighten him.

[steviek]

Originally Posted by l_eclipse_l

I don't see why you guys are bagging on this guy...just wanted some ammo he can go at this douchebag V8 fanboy with. I'm usually the one to get annoyed with peoples posts, but this one seemed like he genuinly just wanted information and didn't want to hear it from a book...he wanted real people to enlighten him.

man that was the sukiest babiest post i have read
why not just have an opinion?

[gthompson97]

Originally Posted by steviek

why not just have an opinion?

I don't know about Canada, but in the U.S, we can't have those anymore, they get you into trouble.

[vanilla gorilla]

Turbocharging won't hurt your engine. As long as you've got the A/F ratio, your good. My car didn't come from the factory turbo, but it is now and has been for the past year with no problems.

I've got a magazine with this guy in it thats got an old school car (dont remember what kind of car cause I havent read it in so long).
But anyways he has an ALL STOCK 2-bolt chevy 350, a junkyard motor as he says. But its twin turboed with gran national turbos and makes 800 horsepower...on a stock internaled 350

[Blackcrow64]

He doesn't know what he is talking about...

If motors were never meant to be turbocharged, then they wouldn't have been doing it since 1905 when they started it. Also let's not forget the simple fact that engineers run stress tests on all different grades of metal before putting a design into production. If in fact that a turbocharger reduces the lifespan of the motor by the additional "stress" then they would have never went with the idea. Just because it burns hotter due to the additional air doesn't mean that it is putting extra stress on a steel block. That steel won't see the results of the additional "stress" until right before 2500 degrees. How many people do you know running a motor that hot, honestly... Nobody... So tell him what's up now. The hottest it will probably ever see is 1200 internally at the max... (Unless somebody has a poorly tuned turbocharged motor and runs it higher, in which case they will only melt any internal aluminum parts way before hand. Aluminum melts around 1200 degree's.) That still gives you over 1000 degree's to play with in an all steel motor...

Hope that helps ya put this idiot in his place.

[SilvrEclipse]

On a perfect tune my car puts out 1550 F on the EGT gauge. Its not till you get up over 1600 do you worry about melting pistons.